Australia to ban incandescent bulbs

SuzannePjamSuzannePjam Posts: 411
edited February 2007 in A Moving Train
I never knew that changing the type of bulb you use can make that much of a difference. I'll definitely be switching all of the bulbs in my house as they burn out. It's too bad that people wait until their back is up against a wall to change their ways. I see Australia wouldn't sign the Kyoto treaty, but now that their country is having a major drought they've decided to take some measures against their contribution to global warming.

Australia to ban incandescent bulbs
Plan would phase them out by 2009

CANBERRA, Australia - Australia will be the world’s first country to ban incandescent lightbulbs in a bid to curb Greenhouse gas emissions, with the government saying on Tuesday they would be phased out within three years. Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull said yellow incandescent bulbs, which have been in use virtually unchanged for 125 years, would be replaced by more efficient compact fluorescent bulbs by 2009.
“By that stage you simply won’t be able to buy incandescent lightbulbs, because they won’t meet the energy standard,” Turnbull told local radio.
Australia along with the U.S. has refused to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol setting Greenhouse Gas reduction targets, calling instead for an agreement requiring energy-hungry developing countries like India and China to help combat climate change.
Turnbull said the banning of incandescent bulbs would help trim 800,000 tons from Australia’s current emissions level by 2012 and lower household lighting costs by 66 per cent.
British and Californian lawmakers also have been lobbying for bans on incandescent lightbulbs, which lose much of their energy as heat.
Australia’s conservative Prime Minister John Howard said he would not adopt any Greenhouse targets which hurt the country’s resource-reliant economy.
Australians are per head among the world’s biggest greenhouse gas producers, but climate change issues are shaping up as major concerns for voters in national elections due later this year as severe drought grips the country.
"Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand

"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    Yeah, I heard this today too SuzannePjam. It's an interesting mandate for our government to make. I can't help wondering if they all have shares in a fluro bulb making company. And please don't remind me of the shame of being governed by a moron who refuses to sign Kyoto. It's just too embarrassing for words. BUT then I guess I've learned to live with a lot of shame about my country in the last 10 years. :(
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    this is a pr move if there ever was one ... really - banning incadescent bulbs?? ... by 2009 - people for their own sake should be using CFL's already ... this is an attempt to show like they are doing something without actually doing the tough things that developed countries like that need to make ..
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    I've been using some in my high use areas of my apartment for about 2 weeks now. I lowered my living room from about 200 watts to 33 and the quality is not really adversly affected, I prefer a warmer quality but the soft white CFL's I got aren't bad and I'm using a lot less energy. Eventually I'll replace everything with them.

    Ultimately we should be setting really tough CAFE standards for automobiles and strongly encouraging automakers to work on cleaner more effective combustion and new clean forms of propulsion. There are loads of different gasoline blends but automakers outside of say honda and toyota have not done enough about emmissions.

    Some kind of super high output solar panel research would be nice too. If it were cost effective to live off the grid, I bet a lot of people would.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban...

    why is this becoming the solution to all problems and issues in the world?
  • godpt3godpt3 Posts: 1,020
    they aren't actually banning incandescants. what they're doing is upping the efficency requirements to the point where it is impossible for incandescants to match it.
    "If all those sweet, young things were laid end to end, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised."
    —Dorothy Parker

    http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/6902/conspiracytheoriesxt6qt8.jpg
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    banning incandescent bulbs is just a bandaid answer. while the people will be forced to switch light globes, industry will still be allowed to spew the pollution into the atmosphere. yet again the real problem is not being addressed.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban ban...

    why is this becoming the solution to all problems and issues in the world?
    Banning certain products or practices can be a good thing if it is proven that certain things are bad and should be eliminated.

    I do think this one is a bit of a joke. Australia has a horrible environmental record so it appears to me that this is some sorta media stunt to show Australia's newfound environmental conscious while ignoring bigger issues like their reliance on coal for energy.
  • Australia does needed to focus more on alternative energy sources, we are massively reliant on coal which is a very dirty fuel. Solar and wind power should be used more. I don't think we should have signed Kyoto, why should we hurt our own economy when in comparison to China and India we are but a drop in the ocean? Kyoto is a flawed treaty....
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    Australia does needed to focus more on alternative energy sources, we are massively reliant on coal which is a very dirty fuel. Solar and wind power should be used more. I don't think we should have signed Kyoto, why should we hurt our own economy when in comparison to China and India we are but a drop in the ocean? Kyoto is a flawed treaty....
    yeah but wasn't it more a symbolic gesture to sign? that's what i saw it as. and of course there was no chance we were gonna sign it if the americans didn't. not to mention the fact that it'd mean big business would have to come to heel.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • sourdough wrote:
    Banning certain products or practices can be a good thing if it is proven that certain things are bad and should be eliminated.

    nope. If a product is inferior, then it needs to adjust or be left behind. Its up to the developer to make sure their product is marketed and cost effective.
  • cate kyoto is more than simply a symbolic gesture. it would sign australia up to a carbon trading scheme that that would disadvantage our economy without helping the environment much at all. everyone has to sign (u.s, china and india et al) otherwise it would be suicide for australia to sign.
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • banning incandescent bulbs is just a bandaid answer. while the people will be forced to switch light globes, industry will still be allowed to spew the pollution into the atmosphere. yet again the real problem is not being addressed.

    Why will people have to switch light globes?
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • cate kyoto is more than simply a symbolic gesture. it would sign australia up to a carbon trading scheme that that would disadvantage our economy without helping the environment much at all. everyone has to sign (u.s, china and india et al) otherwise it would be suicide for australia to sign.


    Wow. Make that 2 folks here that understand Kyoto.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    cate kyoto is more than simply a symbolic gesture. it would sign australia up to a carbon trading scheme that that would disadvantage our economy without helping the environment much at all. everyone has to sign (u.s, china and india et al) otherwise it would be suicide for australia to sign.

    yes i know how it works. but it would have been nice to make the gesture. i am not for carbon trading at all. it just allows the industrialised nations to continu to screw with the environment. it doesn't really address the problem.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • nope. If a product is inferior, then it needs to adjust or be left behind. Its up to the developer to make sure their product is marketed and cost effective.
    What if it is cost effective and works great but has great environmental consequences? Do you think things like DDT should not be banned? Sure it worked great killing bugs and was quite inexpensive to produce, but what about environmental costs?
  • DinghyDogDinghyDog Posts: 587
    edited November 2012
    -
    Post edited by DinghyDog on
  • yeah but wasn't it more a symbolic gesture to sign? that's what i saw it as. and of course there was no chance we were gonna sign it if the americans didn't. not to mention the fact that it'd mean big business would have to come to heel.

    Its my understanding that we've inadvertantly met the emission target set for us by Kyoto anyway, so we might as well have signed it.
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    Scubascott wrote:
    Its my understanding that we've inadvertantly met the emission target set for us by Kyoto anyway, so we might as well have signed it.

    really? where'd you hear that? i thought our carbon footprint was huge.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • really? where'd you hear that? i thought our carbon footprint was huge.
    I'd be really surprised at that too. The coal power plants are extremely inefficient and dirty as hell.
  • really? where'd you hear that? i thought our carbon footprint was huge.

    I could be mistaken. To be honest I'm extremely confused about exactly what we would be expected to do under Kyoto. My understanding is that we were set an emission target of 108% of 1990 levels by 2012, and that we were the only developed country who was allowed to increase our emission levels. As far as I know we are still on track to reach that target, even though we did not sign the treaty. If anyone who understands the deal could explain to me exactly how it works I'd love to hear it, because I'm as confused as hell about it.
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • yes i know how it works. but it would have been nice to make the gesture. i am not for carbon trading at all. it just allows the industrialised nations to continu to screw with the environment. it doesn't really address the problem.


    you are not for carbon trading but think it would be a good gesture? sorry i don't really follow, why sign a treaty that you think is a bad idea and is going to hurt the economy? and isn't going to help the envionment much at all either, and as scubascott has said we met our targets anyway. a carbon trading scheme would work fine if EVERYONE signed it, but as i said before the aussie government would have being stupid beyond belief to sign it. and get what out of it? please a few greenies?
    The wind is blowing cold
    Have we lost our way tonight?
    Have we lost our hope to sorrow?

    Feels like were all alone
    Running further from what’s right
    And there are no more heroes to follow

    So what are we becoming?
    Where did we go wrong?
  • bigmuzzbigmuzz Posts: 299
    some guy is comin to our house on friday to count and check all our lightbulbs, and give us the new ones.

    i dont know why wer cant just TELL them how many we need and do it ourselves, but if they come to your house you get the new lightbulbs for free, so thats pretty cool.

    anyway, thats all i really have to say :)

    peaceout
    Sydney Wed 8 Nov 2006....

    when all are one and one is all, to be a rock and not to roll.........

    see me @ www.myspace.com/bigmuzz

    keep on rockin!.......
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    you are not for carbon trading but think it would be a good gesture? sorry i don't really follow, why sign a treaty that you think is a bad idea and is going to hurt the economy? and isn't going to help the envionment much at all either, and as scubascott has said we met our targets anyway. a carbon trading scheme would work fine if EVERYONE signed it, but as i said before the aussie government would have being stupid beyond belief to sign it. and get what out of it? please a few greenies?

    kyoto aside - is your gov't actually doing anything to reduce emissions?? ... the PR/propaganda surrounding kyoto is ridiculous ... the treaty is not perfect but by no means is it an economy killer unless u operate an economy that doesn't give a shit about the planet ...
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    you are not for carbon trading but think it would be a good gesture? sorry i don't really follow, why sign a treaty that you think is a bad idea and is going to hurt the economy? and isn't going to help the envionment much at all either, and as scubascott has said we met our targets anyway. a carbon trading scheme would work fine if EVERYONE signed it, but as i said before the aussie government would have being stupid beyond belief to sign it. and get what out of it? please a few greenies?

    i think scuba was mistaken. even he expressed doubt.
    that's right i am not for carbon trading, because it allows the developed world to get away with the same thing they are already doing. i hardly call it accountability. signing the kyoto protocol would have shown good faith in joining with the rest of the world as a community and maybe trying to get their act together. and please don't hold the economy up as some sort of talisman to be preserved at all costs. i already know that the state needs capital and that the capital comes from those big businesses who will be most affected by carbon emission reduction.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • bigmuzz wrote:
    some guy is comin to our house on friday to count and check all our lightbulbs, and give us the new ones.

    i dont know why wer cant just TELL them how many we need and do it ourselves, but if they come to your house you get the new lightbulbs for free, so thats pretty cool.

    anyway, thats all i really have to say :)

    peaceout

    My parents got a box of free CF bulbs in the mail. Some special offer that was advertised in a magazine. About $100 worth. Supplied by one of the companies that manufactures them, in conjunction with some green group. I don't think there was even a catch. There was alot of promotional material in the box too obviously, but it didn't cost anything at all.

    I have CF bulbs everywhere in my house anyway. They're a lot cheaper to run, and they last forever compared to incandescent bulbs.
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • polaris wrote:
    kyoto aside - is your gov't actually doing anything to reduce emissions?? ... the PR/propaganda surrounding kyoto is ridiculous ... the treaty is not perfect but by no means is it an economy killer unless u operate an economy that doesn't give a shit about the planet ...

    The current rhetoric from the government is all about so called 'clean coal technology' and nuclear power.

    The idea of the clean coal is that the carbon emitted from powerplants is sequestered underground. It sounds quite promising, but looks like its still a few years away, and some estimates say that it might add as much as 30% to our power bills.
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    sourdough wrote:
    What if it is cost effective and works great but has great environmental consequences? Do you think things like DDT should not be banned? Sure it worked great killing bugs and was quite inexpensive to produce, but what about environmental costs?

    I think he works for Ford. 'nuff said.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Ontario is currently mulling the same law and outlawing incandescents. I don't think its a bad idea, however I do prefer offering incentives and education as an alternative.
  • sourdough wrote:
    Banning certain products or practices can be a good thing if it is proven that certain things are bad and should be eliminated.

    I do think this one is a bit of a joke. Australia has a horrible environmental record so it appears to me that this is some sorta media stunt to show Australia's newfound environmental conscious while ignoring bigger issues like their reliance on coal for energy.

    I don't know that our environmental conscience is newfound. Its always been there. Its just that our governments, particularly the current one, seem to place environmental issues fairly low on their agendas. This is hardly surprising, since our economy depends heavily on primary industries such as mining and agriculture.

    The coal issue isn't being ignored. I don't know that the solutions being offered are really the best ones, but there at least some ideas being put forward.

    By the way, is this the solar project that was mentioned in the other thread on nuclear power in Australia?

    http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/800

    There has also been talk about building a solar tower at Mildura. If built, it would stand 1000 metres high, with a base area of 25,000 acres. The idea is that air heated by the sun at the base rises through the tower, turning electricity generating turbines on its way up.

    You can read all about it here. Its a bit sensationlist, but it gives you the idea. I couldn't help laughing when they referred to Mildura as 'outback Australia', and saw the illustration showing the tower in the middle of the desert. Mildura is on the biggest river in Australia, and has a thriving irrigation industry. Those are just details though.

    http://www.enviromission.com.au/pdfs/ecos_sept_oct_2003.pdf
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • Sorry you're right. I was referring to the Aussie gov't which has a reputation for being less than green, not Australia in general.

    Solar power would be an obvious alterative for sunny Australia.
Sign In or Register to comment.